Bachmann, though, consistently gets away with saying some terrible things. I suppose that’s because she’s standing up for good old American virtues, like pollution, greed, and bigotry.
Archive for the 'CD6' Category
Page 2 of 6
One more thought on Zack’s post about crazy Michele Bachmann. Can you imagine how ballistic conservatives would have gone if a Democrat had said something like that? Suppose Keith Ellison said that Minnesotans need to be “armed and dangerous” over exorbitant bonuses for corporate executives. He would have been called a communist, a traitor, and far worse.
Michele Bachmann is up to her old tricks:
Asked about the White House-backed cap-and-trade proposal to reduce carbon emissions, Bachmann told WWTC 1280 AM, “I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us ‘having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,’ and the people — we the people — are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country. And I think this has the potential of changing the dynamic of freedom forever in the United States.”
Is Bachmann calling for an armed revolution against the government? I think they have a word for that…oh yeah…treason.
Cringe-worthy:
As Steele concluded his remarks, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann — the event’s moderator — told Steele he was “da man.”
“Michael Steele! You be da man! You be da man,” she said.
I really want to see some video of this.
Most of you have probably already heard about Michele Bachmann’s disastrous interview on KTLK the other day. For those that haven’t, the Washington Monthly has a nice overview here. I just want to draw attention to one particular lie Bachmann told in the interview, namely that the stimulus bill was a plot by Democratic lawmakers to funnel money to their districts at the expense of Republican represented districts. Well, Ollie Ox did the research and - unsurprisingly - Bachmann was wrong. Here is the congressional district breakdown of the job creation projections for Minnesota:
Congressional District 1 Minnesota 7,800
Congressional District 2 Minnesota 9,200
Congressional District 3 Minnesota 8,300
Congressional District 4 Minnesota 7,700
Congressional District 5 Minnesota 7,900
Congressional District 6 Minnesota 9,500
Congressional District 7 Minnesota 7,500
Congressional District 8 Minnesota 8,100
Notice two things about this chart: First, the top three districts in terms of jobs created are the 6th, the 2nd and the 3rd. Those districts also happen to be the only three districts in Minnesota represented by Republicans. If that weren’t enough, Bachmann’s own district stands to benefit the most from the stimulus bill!
Thanks to Bluestem Prairie for the fact-check.
Via Joe and the folks at MN Progressive Project, and the handy tipster who sent it in.
El Tinklenberg has about $500,000 in the bank. This is frustrating for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the airtime you can buy with a half a million dollars. But Joe’s analysis gets to the core of the remaining dough, and that is that most likely the Tinklenberg campaign was simply overwhelmed by the amount of money they had pouring in in the last few weeks of the campaign.
It also highlights one of the problems with the netroots and that is specifically the use of ancillary services like ActBlue. The argument in favor of using sites like ActBlue is it allows for the netroots to quantify their contributions to campaigns, but what happens when you donate through ActBlue is that a check gets cut by ActBlue and sent to the campaigns you donate to. That’s why usually I’d send people straight to campaigns fundraising pages, that turn around can be a real problem for campaigns. How much of that 500K did Tink get from Monday the 3rd of November on? I don’t think it was a substantial amount — just something to consider.
But finally the most important thing to consider is — what happens to those fat stacks of cash now? I think (and excuse me if I’m wrong, I’ve got finals and just don’t care enough to do the minutes of research) he can dole out $2000 to individual candidate committees, he could give large sums to party units or… he could just sit on it and run again in 2 years. El would be 60, which isn’t particularly old for a member of congress, he’d have a lot of money to start his campaign with and he’d have one election cycle of congressional campaign experience.
We’ll have to watch what he does with his money to get a good grasp on what he intends to do in two years.
Bob Anderson, a name that this blog has never uttered once until today, made a serious impact on the results in CD6 yesterday:
BOB ANDERSON 40642 10.04%
MICHELE BACHMANN 187805 46.41%
EL TINKLENBERG 175784 43.44%
Who are these people that voted Bob Anderson? The IP endorsed El Tinklenberg! MPR’s Bob Collins:
Who is Bob Anderson? Michele Bachmann’s best friend.
Bob [Collins]’s theory of politics in Minnesota is if you put an Independence Party candidate not named Jesse Ventura on a ballot, Republicans win.
Independence Party fans hate me for saying that but for the most part, it’s true.
They can logically point to Al Franken’s Senate race tonight — so far — as proof the theory doesn’t stand up.
And I’ll counter with Bob Anderson, a veritable unknown who is clearly pulling votes from Elwyn Tinklenberg tonight, paving the way — again, so far — for Michele Bachmann.
MinnPost’s Doug Grow (emphasis mine):
Anderson – who had no money and only one issue (health insurance coverage for mental health problems) – managed to get 10 percent of the vote running as the Independence Party candidate.
Funny thing, though. Anderson really wasn’t the IP’s candidate. Tinklenberg was. In fact, the IP hierarchy – such as it is – is offended by Anderson, who is seen as a gadfly.
But when the IPs endorsed Tinklenberg, Anderson grabbed a golden opportunity. He ran, unopposed, in the primary as the IP representative. He won the IP spot on Tuesday’s ballot and, coupled with that comfortable Minnesota name, managed to win thousands of independent votes.
Here’s the kicker:
It could also be that nobody offered to give him anything. No matter, Anderson said he spent less than $200 on his campaign, which begs the question: If he’d spent $300, could he have won 15 percent of the 6th District vote?
More at MinnPost, MPR’s News Cut.
Sidenote: if it was an Instant Runoff Voting election, I strongly believe Tinklenberg would have won.
KSTP just aired their exclusive SUSA poll, which of course in the past has been a fantastic display of polling incompetency in Minnesota. This is what they published tonight:
CD6: Bachmann 46, Tinklenberg 45, Anderson 6
CD3: Paulsen 46, Madia 41, Dillon 10
Sen: Coleman 44, Franken 39, Barkley 16
Pres: Obama 49, McCain 46, Other 3
Regular MNpublius readers have seen a lot of polls and SUSA has always been the right-wing outlier. One reason is that SurveyUSA only polls people it knows are likely voters. The problem with that, is that in 2004 for example, over 20% of the electorate voted with the same day registration process. If there is a remotely similar situation this Tuesday, be mindful that SUSA would have not polled any of those people.
Another way to look at this is to compare KSTP/SUSA to other polls. Here’s FiveThirtyEight’s breakdown of recent polls on the presidential race in Minnesota:
So when Survey USA and KSTP say that Obama is only leading by 3, how far off might their polling for Senate, CD3 and CD6?
If you’re interested, dig into the crosstabs: CD3, CD6, Senate, President. Normally I consider the crosstabs are worthy of further analysis but I don’t feel like bothering digging into a throwaway poll.
UPDATE: Paul Demko at Minnesota Independent points to Nate Silver of The Plank and FiveThirtyEight:
Don’t worry too much about that SurveyUSA result in Minnesota, which shows Obama just 3 points ahead. SurveyUSA’s polling in Minnesota has been very, very weird all year; they’ve never shown Obama with larger than a 6 point lead in their likely voter model, and had McCain ahead in the state as recently as October 1st. SurveyUSA does not have a Republican lean in general, but in Minnesota, it has consistently had a huge one.
As Erik Paulsen and Norm Coleman strive to present themselves as “moderates,” Eva Young points out that Norm Coleman headlined an “fringe” event with Michele Bachmann.
Rachel E. Stassen-Berger adds:
Dennis Prager, Michael Medved and Hugh Hewitt, conservative radio superstars who Hewitt called the “three tenors of talk,” were in Minneapolis Tuesday night to “Talk the Vote” before a crowd of more than 3,000 cheering supporters at Orchestra Hall.
They were joined by Republican office holders and candidates, including Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Sen. Norm Coleman, Rep. Michele Bachmann, state House Minority Leader Erik Paulsen, who is vying for 3rd District U.S. House seat, and others.
Paul Schmelzer then digs into the trash talk and extreme partisan rhetoric spewed at the event. It’s rather disgusting.
If Paulsen and Coleman are trying to position themselves as the “moderates” they’re not, what made them think it was a good idea to party with the extremists and Michele Bachmann?
Matt Adds: I just wanted to note how unbelievable it is that Coleman feels comfortable appearing onstage with someone that declares, in front of Coleman’s eyes, that equality “is not an American value.” And that just 2 years ago stated that if Congressman Keith Ellison won’t take his oath of office on a Bible, he shouldn’t be allowed to serve. Going so far as to say that Ellison taking his oath on the Koran would embolden terrorists… which is, of course, why George Bush’s State Department immediately recruited him for a number of good will tours around the Mid-East. I expect this of self-proclaimed far-righters like Paulsen and Bachmann, but it is just amazing that someone who has (falsely) claimed that he’s a centrist would dare appear on stage with these moon-bats under a week before the election. I guess you can’t hide your true colors forever…
Even though I’ve been heavily cynical about the Star Tribune, I did want to note about their endorsements for tomorrow’s paper. David Brauer points out:
In the Sixth, editorialists avoid nuclear outrage by picking Tinklenberg. They weigh in for the first time on you-know-what; Bachmann’s “anti-America” paradigm “adds to the list of bizarre incidents and statements that undercut her credibility as a political leader.”
Even though the Star Tribune has gone far to the right, nobody in their right mind can endorse Bachmann. Interesting though, is that they absolutely destroy Erik Paulsen but cannot bring themselves to endorse Madia so they opt for a “non-endorsement“ instead:
But Paulsen’s endorsement interview was disappointing. His answers on energy, health care and foreign policy lacked depth, detail and vision. Paulsen performed better at debates, but did not make the case that he has the depth needed to be a strong, independent leader in Congress.
Paulsen was a fiscal and social conservative in the Legislature, voting for measures that this newspaper opposed. Why he’s casting himself as a moderate in this race is unclear. His conservative credentials are solid; he should have run on them.
Paulsen is farther right than the Star Tribune and they’re criticizing him for not running on his conservative credentials? They even point out how he’s trying to run as a moderate. While I am not at all surprised by the Star Tribune not endorsing Madia, the fact that they trash Paulsen so badly is rather telling.
SurveyUSA just released a poll of the 6th District:
Bachmann - 44%
Tinklenberg - 47%
An incumbent behind this late in the ball game is in big, big trouble. Perhaps that is why Bachmann was included on the GOP’s “Death List”
In other CD 6 news, El is up with this great new ad…
Michele Bachmann just keeps digging herself a deeper and deeper hole. Today on the Washington Times’ radio show, Bachmann went on another rant against Barack Obama. Here is the key moment…
“And I think my comments on Chris Matthew’s Hardball touched a nerve also. And it was what are Barack Obama’s views? Are they anti-American? And when you examine Barack Obama’s views, he is imbibing in socialism with redistribution of wealth and punishing high tax rates.”
Imbibing?
You can listen to it here. (Bachmann’s segment is at 16 minutes in, these comments are about 22 minutes in.)
KSTP/SurveyUSA will have a poll of the 6th CD tonight. They’ll reveal the results at 10 pm.
This goes to the core of why we have to beat Michele Bachmann:
Minnesotans are some of the most open-minded and tolerant people I know. During World War II, my wife’s Japanese-American grandparents lived in Minnesota where her grandfather was stationed as a soldier in the U.S. Army before being deployed to the Pacific. At that time, many of their family members were still living in the internment camps set up by the U.S. government for Japanese-Americans, almost all of whom were loyal to the United States. My wife’s grandparents fondly remember their time in Minnesota because it was the only place where they were welcomed — where they were not judged as being anti-American just because their heritage was Japanese.
I have seen this same open spirit in my personal interactions with friends from Minnesota, and in leaders such as Hubert Humphrey, who advocated civil rights at the national level long before it was popular. So it troubles me that the reputation of Minnesota is being tarnished by Michele Bachmann, who presumes to judge who is “pro-American” and “anti-American” and who advocated scrutinizing members of Congress to “find out, are they pro-America or anti-America?” That’s not the great Minnesota tradition of openness and tolerance; it’s the spirit of Joe McCarthy.
Minnesotans are the only ones who can repudiate these ugly words by holding Bachmann accountable at the ballot box. As a Michigander, I cannot vote in your congressional election, but as someone who appreciates and respects the tolerance Minnesotans have shown to members of my own family, I urge you to elect a member of Congress who will continue that honorable tradition.
I don’t have much to add, except to say that Bachmann’s defeat is all the more important because she has taken it upon herself to become a major media personality. Hardly a day goes by that she doesn’t make the rounds on one of the cable networks (and they’ll keep inviting her if she keeps saying ridiculous nonsense, its good for the ratings). I am repulsed by the thought that someone watching from far away will judge Minnesota based on Michele Bachmann’s McCarthyist rants.
This just continues to get crazier (from HuffPost):
Two sources aware of ad buys in Minnesota say that the National Republican Congressional Committee is pulling its media purchases from Bachmann’s race. If true, it is a remarkable fall for a congresswoman who, until recently, seemed relatively safe in her predominantly conservative district. The race had become closer in recent days — the NRCC had transferred funds from Rep. Erik Paulsen (MN-03) to Bachmann a little over a week ago.
In the days following her appearance on Hardball, however, Bachmann has watched as her challenger, El Tinklenberg raised more than a million dollars off her incendiary remarks. That surge in fundraising put Bachmann’s re-election in a far less certain position. Bachmann tried to stem the bleeding by telling the press she was sorry for her remarks. But with the national party now apparently pulling the plug, the situation has gone from bad to worse.
To be fair, this is likely not because the NRCC feels that the race is lost; it may be, but I doubt that it’s that much of a done deal at this point. More likely, and almost as damning, is that the NRCC has realized that it simply can’t afford to fight this battle with all the other contentious races around the country. Bachmann backed herself into a corner where it’s going to take more resources than the NRCC can muster in order to properly defend her (after all, she did raise over $1 million for her opponent). This is a bit of a catch-22 for the Republicans, however, because they’re pulling their ads because it’s getting too expensive to ensure a Bachmann win, but by pulling out they’re making that win all that more uncertain.
The bottom line is, no matter what the NRCC’s reasoning, that this is a good thing for El Tinklenberg and, by extension, Minnesota. Bachmann evidenced how totally nuts she is by calling for a new era of McCarthyism; this is not only dangerous, but it’s embarrassing for Minnesota. So, please, ensure that this woman’s career in politics comes to an end, donate to El Tinklenberg, volunteer on his campaign, or simply take a moment to learn about this compelling candidate. Our State’s dignity and our Country’s sanity may depend on it…
People Are Shouting
RSS